Smalltalk › Frameworks & Tools › Seaside › Seaside Development

HTTP 302 vs 303

‹ Previous Topic Next Topic ›
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
♦
♦
 4 messages Options
Philippe Marschall
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
♦
♦
|

HTTP 302 vs 303

Philippe Marschall
Hi

I came upon this HN thread [1]. The linked article suggests we should
use HTTP 303 instead of 302 (because we want a change from POST to
GET).

 [1] http://insanecoding.blogspot.ch/2014/02/http-308-incompetence-expected.html

Cheers
Philippe
_______________________________________________
seaside-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/seaside-dev
Tobias Pape
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
♦
♦
|

Re: HTTP 302 vs 303

Tobias Pape
On 17.02.2014, at 17:26, Philippe Marschall <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi
>
> I came upon this HN thread [1]. The linked article suggests we should
> use HTTP 303 instead of 302 (because we want a change from POST to
> GET).
>
> [1] http://insanecoding.blogspot.ch/2014/02/http-308-incompetence-expected.html

But we have to make sure, the line is speaking HTTP1.1, right?
(see note in http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec10.html#sec10.3.4)

Best
        -Tobias



_______________________________________________
seaside-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/seaside-dev

signature.asc (1K) Download Attachment
Johan Brichau-2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
♦
♦
|

Re: HTTP 302 vs 303

Johan Brichau-2

On 17 Feb 2014, at 18:04, Tobias Pape <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 17.02.2014, at 17:26, Philippe Marschall <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> I came upon this HN thread [1]. The linked article suggests we should
>> use HTTP 303 instead of 302 (because we want a change from POST to
>> GET).
>>
>> [1] http://insanecoding.blogspot.ch/2014/02/http-308-incompetence-expected.html
>
> But we have to make sure, the line is speaking HTTP1.1, right?
> (see note in http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec10.html#sec10.3.4)

The joys of web standards ;-)
We should definitely add it to the stack.

Johan_______________________________________________
seaside-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/seaside-dev
Johan Brichau-2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
♦
♦
|

Re: HTTP 302 vs 303

Johan Brichau-2
In reply to this post by Tobias Pape
They changed the spec [1] to reflect the state of the practice.

I did not read it through yet, but it seems we can forget about this issue.


On 17 Feb 2014, at 18:04, Tobias Pape <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 17.02.2014, at 17:26, Philippe Marschall <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi

I came upon this HN thread [1]. The linked article suggests we should
use HTTP 303 instead of 302 (because we want a change from POST to
GET).

[1] http://insanecoding.blogspot.ch/2014/02/http-308-incompetence-expected.html

But we have to make sure, the line is speaking HTTP1.1, right?
(see note in http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec10.html#sec10.3.4)

Best
   -Tobias


_______________________________________________
seaside-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/seaside-dev

_______________________________________________
seaside-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/seaside-dev
Free forum by Nabble Edit this page